Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 17
02/20/2008 03:00 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR32 | |
| HB331 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 331 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HJR 32 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HJR 32-BROADCASTING INDUSTRY 3:06:56 PM CHAIR OLSON announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 32, Supporting open and free competition within the broadcasting industry. REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor, explained that HJR 32 supports robust and competitive airwaves by opposing federal action that would reverse or inhibit open and free competition within the broadcasting industry. [The fairness doctrine is a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which was passed by Congress in 1987, but vetoed by President Reagan.] Since the lifting of what is "mislabeled" as the "fairness doctrine," the public has had unfiltered publicly accessible airwaves. [In 1987, when the courts declared that the doctrine was not mandated by Congress and the FCC did not have to enforce it, the FCC dissolved the doctrine.] While Representative Stoltze suggested he does not always agree with what is broadcast on the airwaves, he supports open, free airwaves. 3:09:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN inquired as to what brought this matter to Representative Stoltze's attention. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered that ongoing legislation in Congress would reenact the fairness doctrine and curb open unfiltered talk radio. In further response to Representative Neuman, Representative Stoltze explained that under the fairness doctrine, if you put forth one controversial idea, you must provide equal air time for a competing idea. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, in response to Representative Neuman, answered that this resolution is offered as a courtesy to the federal delegation and to allow all ideas to enter the marketplace. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, in response to Representative Neuman, offered to find out whether HJR 32 would affect public radio. 3:12:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO applauded the fact that the resolution is directed only to the Alaska delegation and not the entire Congress. He inquired as to whether HJR 32 would affect talk show hosts who are also legislators by requiring them to provide equal air time to their opponents. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE responded that the resolution supports equal time for competing ideas so the station would probably air music if air time was not marketplace viable. 3:15:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, in response to Representative Buch, answered that the resolution does not condemn an act, but strongly discourages passage of an act. 3:15:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE BUCH referred to a page 2 of a handout in the committee packet, titled "CNSNews.Com, Cybercast News Service" which read: "The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that the doctrine did not violate the First Amendment because the airwaves belonged to the public and thus could face government regulation to which print media were not subjected." He inquired as to whether the resolution affects what has already been affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE conveyed that the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted that it was legal to invoke the Fairness Doctrine, but it did not mandate it. Instead, an administrative decision was issued in 1987. The Fairness Doctrine does not violate the first amendment, but it violates the principle of the free marketplace, he opined. REPRESENTATIVE BUCH referred to a committee handout labeled, "MSNBC.com" which read: "According to researchers, more than 85 percent of talk-radio programming leans to the right - at least by the researchers' definition." He voiced that if that were the case, it would seem that the information currently being broadcast is one sided by 85 percent. In essence, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the Fairness Doctrine does not violate the first amendment. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE pointed out that it would not be hard to search for another quote to demonstrate that the three major network stations also broadcast information that is predominately slanted in another way. He offered that the packet includes pro and con comments on the Fairness Doctrine so the committee members will have a wide spectrum of ideas to consider. You cannot force people to listen to specific programs, he opined. Thus, he prefers to support the concept of the marketplace ultimately deciding what programs are viable. 3:20:49 PM REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to whether the Fairness Doctrine was repealed in 1987 and is not currently in effect. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE agreed that is correct. REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX further inquired as to the effect of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine on radio stations in Anchorage and how it would affect political candidates. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE replied that the principle is based on the premise that anyone could demand equal time. If the Fairness Doctrine is reinstated the result would be that the format of programs such as those on talk radio would disappear since people would not want to give equal time to their opponents, he opined. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, in response to Representative LeDoux, explained that the time must be made available as a public service. REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX further inquired if the opponent would be required to pay for the equal time. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE answered that the equal time would be provided as a public service. He offered that lifting the Fairness Doctrine by President Reagan's administration removed an artificial barrier which allowed talk radio to blossom. He explained that programs such as the Rush Limbaugh Show and other hosted talk radio programs did not exist prior to the lift of the Fairness Doctrine, since stations were required to provide free air time for responses to any controversial opinions that were broadcast. Talk radio programs cropped up because stations could broadcast editorial commentary without having to present opposing views, he opined. Therefore, while talk radio shows were not prohibited, these programs didn't happen due to the natural restrictions in the marketplace. 3:24:13 PM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN pointed out that broadcasting companies are for-profit businesses. He inquired as to whether the state or any government has the right to restrict free enterprise businesses on news media they can broadcast. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE explained that is exactly his premise for introducing HJR 32. He noted that he has heard most of the committee members on talk radio since Alaska radio stations are open, accessible, and air competing ideas. Further, Alaska radio stations want to keep their listeners, so stations tend to internally balance views, he opined. 3:26:44 PM REPRESENTATIVE GATTO surmised that perhaps entities such as universities, newspapers, and art museums should also be required to divide evenly between viewpoints. If government is going to control society, perhaps it should control all of society, or else none at all. 3:27:52 PM REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE, in response to Representative LeDoux, replied regulations govern what can be broadcast on airwaves. This resolution is limited to open and free access of airwaves and does not address program content or any laws against pornography. 3:31:00 PM CHAIR OLSON, after first determining no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony on HJR 32. 3:31:07 PM REPRESENTATIVE NEUMAN moved to report HJR 32 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. REPRESENTATIVE BUCH objected. 3:31:26 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gatto, LeDoux, Ramras, Gardner, Neuman, and Olson voted in favor of moving HJR 32 from committee. Representative Buch voted against it. Therefore, HJR 32 was reported out of the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee by a vote of 6-1.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|